Will U.S., Russia launch new dialogue on ABM?

March 22 2013

Andrei Ilyashenko

special to RBTH

The U.S. announced that the cancellation of the fourth phase of its AMB in Europe would allow resources to be shifted to Asia from Europe. Pictured: The U.S. "Patriot" missiles units at the Defense Ministry in Japan. Source: AP

Although some Russian experts argue that Washington’s decision to cancel the final stage of its ABM in Europe is a reaction to Russia’s strong opposition, the U.S. denies these assumptions.

Related:

U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said in mid-March that
the cancellation of the fourth and final phase of the U.S. missile defense
system based in Europe would allow resources to be shifted to Asia from Europe.
He told reporters that the missile threat from North Korea prompted the U.S. to
add 14 new anti-missile interceptors in Alaska.

“This will increase the number
of ground-based interceptors to 44 from 30, including four in California,” said
Hagel.

In addition, the U.S. will provide Japan with an additional radar
possibly create a third silo-based missile defense base on its own territory.

As for European defenses, the U.S. is canceling the phase
of the project that has been criticized by Moscow. The U.S. has no more plans
to deploy SM3-IIB interceptors, which would be capable of engaging Russian
intercontinental missiles near the Russian state border in Poland.

It seems that the U.S. is ready to meet Russia halfway. It
was Russia that demanded its missiles not be threatened, as this might have
compromised the strategic parity and result in a new arms race.

However, Hagel has stated that the Pentagon’s recent
decision is not connected with Russia. A senior administration official who
spoke to the New York Times on the condition of anonymity made a milder
statement on the issue.

“If there are side benefits that accrue with Russia, so
be it. But that wasn’t a primary driver,” said the source.

Nonetheless, the decision to cancel some of the European-based
defenses is in line with Moscow’s demands not to deploy anti-missile systems
near its border. Chief of General Staff Nikolai Makarov referred to this when
speaking at an international conference on anti-missile defense in Moscow last
May.

Steven Pifer at the Brookings Arms Control Initiative
believes that “nothing threatens Russian missiles now.” Even so, this is
clearly not enough for a breakthrough in the prolonged confrontation between
Moscow and Washington over missile defense systems.

When commenting on Washington’s statements, Deputy Foreign
Minister Sergei Ryabkov noted that the elements of the anti-missile shield
planning to be deployed by the U.S. as part of the first three phases are
highly mobile.

“They will be deployed on ships, which can move between water
areas within days. The land-based elements are mobile, too,” the diplomat said.
This means there is still a threat to the Russian missile potential. Moscow is
still seeking “legally binding agreements that all elements of the U.S. missile-defense
system are not aimed at Russian strategic nuclear forces.”

The decision by the U.S. sets the stage — at least
psychologically— for resetting the dialogue on anti-missile defense, which had
reached a stalemate and started poisoning the already tense relationship.
Fyodor Lukyanov, chairman of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy,
believes that the Russian side should welcome the move, whatever the motives.

“Judging by Moscow’s response, however, it seems that there will be no dramatic
changes in Russia’s approach to missile defense systems,” said Lukyanov.